# Taste of Edicion Limitada Wrapper



## Bruce5 (Jul 27, 2003)

Not to step on any toes, but is anyone *not* fond of the wrapper. 
.
My experience is much less than some on CS. It is the same wrapper on over a dozen cigars, which I have smoked every brand and size. I am one of the people who think that wrapper contributes a great deal to the flavor of the cigar. Now we have had prior threads as to what percentage each person thinks the wrapper contributes and the smaller ring gauge theory. (which will inevitably come out on this post as well). Understand I am not taking away from the part that the binder and the filler contribute to taste. 
.
I am just not fond of the taste of the wrapper, hence I am not fond of the Edicion Limitadas. 
.
Now again, I am not trying to step on any toes, but was wondering:
1) If there were others who shy away from these cigars?
2) Is it because of the wrapper? Do you agree with my thoughts?
3) If not the wrapper, then why?
.
And please, nobody give me the :gn


----------



## OpusEx (Oct 31, 2003)

I have had some, but certainly not all of the EL's and have found that I haven't liked any of them either. The one exception would be the Cohiba DC (though I have only had one of these, I really enoyed it). It could be that the wrapper just does not go well with the filler and binder, thus the over all taste delivery is "tainted"?. Maybe the leaf used for the wrapper is just not "up to par" with the leaf used for the filler and binder? What ever the reasons, you are not the only one who shys away from these cigars. I'd gladly take more cigars of regular production that I like than a less amount of EL's for the same $.


----------



## Brandon (Dec 11, 1997)

Anybody who knows me knows I hardly ever smoke a double banded cigar  There's only 1 E.L that I truly liked. It was one of the RyJ Piramides EL's. The cigar did not look like an E.L. at all. It had a nice thinner wrapper with a deep rosado colorado wrapper. It actually tasted like an RyJ. I find the E.L.'s hardly ever taste like a good representation of their brand. I haven't had all of the E.L.'s out, but the PSD3 and Monte DC EL have been the best ones for my tastes(2nd to the RyJ). Although decent cigars, they have more of the pungent, maduro taste that is representative of domestic maduros. Personally, all of the best cigars that I've ever smoked possessed either a claro-colorado, colorado, or rosado shade of wrapper. I'm not a fan of maduro-colorado or maduro shade wrappers.


----------



## Bruce5 (Jul 27, 2003)

Fredster had a Monte DC EL where the wrapper did not look like the EL wrapper either. Pretty much looked like the regular production wrapper. The cigar however was fantastic. That was pretty much my only positive experience.


----------



## SVTNate (Dec 22, 2003)

It's absolutely the wrapper that gives EL's across the board that sweet taste. I know several people who don't like them. Me, I'm not a big fan, but I really enjoy the PSD3's. I got a box of PSD1's and RyJ Hermoso #2's this year for aging, both of which will remain sealed until sometime next year maybe. I probably won't buy any more EL's anytime soon, and the Sublimes certainly don't excite me (of course I'll try a couple, gotta stay on top of all these new releases!)

I find the Cohiba DC's to be a collosal waste of money, but hey, luckily there's lots of choices out there for us


----------



## MoTheMan (May 24, 2003)

The EL wrapper is supposed to be a Habano 2000 leaf, hence the knid of taste & smoke that it gives.

I agree with what's being said here. It's not really the best wrapper to have on a cigar, and as for the EL editions, I think it's just a big friggin' marketing ploy.

Now I've liked some of the EL cigars (Partagas Pyramid, Cohiba DC) but as for the rest . . . .


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

I don't like their taste and don't like their roughness. Of course early on (I think it was back in 2000 or 2001) bought some boxes to put away, but once the initial hype was over, I wisened up and stopped buying them. I know many would disagree, but everyone's got their own taste!


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

I don't care for the EL's and I refuse to buy them.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

the last few i've had, and i've only had a handful, have been average smokes. i'm not gonna fork out the extra dough unless someone has a huge sale or something and it's a size/brand that i like, and it's gotten great reviews. 

i've been finding that regular production cigars can be just as good, and often times, better, for a cheaper price.


----------



## El Rey del Mundo (Jul 11, 2004)

I havent tried that many EL´s either... But I liked Romeo y Julieta Robusto and the Cohiba Piramides wasnt too bad either but not fantastic as I recalled it... I smoked the Cohiba on my birthday...


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

I would say overall they are not worth the extra $. I've had some that did not burn properly and some that were ok. I think the wrapper may contribute a bit of sweetness to the flavor. Don't get me wrong when I say this, but I think the reason a lot of people don't like them is because they are smoking them too young. These things come out and everyone wants to be the first to try, and none of these cigars tasted good young to me. Some of the ones Iv'e really liked had 2 or 3 years age. The Monte Robustos, Romeo robustos (much fuller than a Ex.#4), Romeo Pyramid's ( thanks Mo), Monte D.C.'s, PSD#3's, Part. Pyramids, and Hoyo Particualrs were all very good. The Monte D.C. is my favorite. What do all these have in common? They are all 01's that I smoked with 2 or more years age. I think the 03 Hoyo Pyramid is going to age well and be a great smoke also. I tried a lot of these 01's when they first were released, and none impressed at all.


----------



## Lamar (Dec 12, 1997)

Fredster

I'm with you on this one. I just believe that some of the EL's will age well. In particular the D3's and the R&J Hermosas should be great smokes in time.


----------



## Pablo (Oct 13, 1997)

I haven't liked many of them fresh. They seem to get better with age, although there has not been a lot of time to determine that.


----------



## Brandon (Dec 11, 1997)

I understand that these need age; but with 3 years of age, they still do not suit my tastes. They are good, but I'd rather spend less money on other regular production cigars that I like more.


----------



## coppertop (Dec 29, 2003)

Word.............haven't been supper impressed with them either. I am looking forward to the Partagas that Poker sent me with the Palio group buy.


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

Brandon said:


> I understand that these need age; but with 3 years of age, they still do not suit my tastes. They are good, but I'd rather spend less money on other regular production cigars that I like more.


I agree. Regular production is very good to me, why spend the extra cash on the EL;s when the regular production cigars do just fine.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Brandon said:


> I understand that these need age; but with 3 years of age, they still do not suit my tastes. They are good, but I'd rather spend less money on other regular production cigars that I like more.


I hear you and agree for the most part, but I like the D.C. size, and none of the reg production ones are as good as the Monte to me. I'd even take em over the 1993 Hoyo D.C. I had lately.


----------



## SLR (Jan 1, 2000)

Worse wrapper ever produced by Cuba. Thick, chewy, and sweet just does not work for a Habano cigar. Add that to the premium price they charge for EL's and you get a really shitty cigar that costs too much. JMHO of course.


----------



## Bruce5 (Jul 27, 2003)

SLR said:


> Worse wrapper ever produced by Cuba. Thick, chewy, and sweet just does not work for a Habano cigar. Add that to the premium price they charge for EL's and you get a really shitty cigar that costs too much. JMHO of course.


.
You are my kind of guy!!!!


----------



## SLR (Jan 1, 2000)

oh I dissagree about aging EL's. No amount of age will improve the flavor of the EL's. That is wishfull thinking.


----------



## drill (Jan 1, 2000)

i havent smoked any yet that i thought where great
they all taste fairly similar to me
though the 1's i think are worst are the monte's
i have a few box's of some but they are in long term storage
the 1's ive liked best so far are the ryj dc's which still need plenty of time but are turning around
still havent tried any of the partagas pyramids

k


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

SLR said:


> oh I dissagree about aging EL's. No amount of age will improve the flavor of the EL's. That is wishfull thinking.


Since when does additional aging not improve a Cuban cigar??? I've experienced a huge difference in some of the 01 L.E.'s I've been smoking lately, compared with when they first came out. They still may not be your cup of tea, but to say they don't improve with age is rediculous. I don't think for the most part they are worth the extra$, but I've been very satisfied with some of them. The Monte D.C.'s are starting to get very good now, I think Bruce and Heartpumper will agree. Some of these were just unsmokable young, but are aging very nicely. Some of the thicker wrappers were fireproof, some I've had burned fine. Even the thicker ones burned better after aging 4 years and keeping at a bit lower humidity.


----------



## Bruce5 (Jul 27, 2003)

Bruce5 said:


> Fredster had a Monte DC EL where the wrapper did not look like the EL wrapper either. Pretty much looked like the regular production wrapper. The cigar however was fantastic. That was pretty much my only positive experience.


.
Fred - 
See the above post which was earlier on the thread. 
I liked the comment on the fire-proof wrappers.
My 01 Monte robustos, even with 2 years on them,
would not burn and tasted average at best.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Bruce5 said:


> .
> Fred -
> See the above post which was earlier on the thread.
> I liked the comment on the fire-proof wrappers.
> ...


Bruce,
The 01 Monte robustos I had did not taste that great with only 8 months age. However, when I finished that box they had about 3 years and were tasting fantastic. The wrappers were very thick and had some burn issues. They required some touch-ups for sure. They did burn better at 3 years than they did fresh, and keeping them around 64% humidity helped. The Monte D.C.'s I have are not the darkest L.E.'s I've seen, but darker than 90% of the other cigars I have. The wrappers are not real thick and burn fine, as you already know after smoking one. I'd say out of all the 01 L.E.'s I've smoked, about half had the thick wrappers with burn issues. I've had at least one box of all the 01's. More on some of the ones I really liked. All I'm saying is not all of the L.E.'s suck, and if I could find another box of the Monte D.C.'s for the 350.00 I paid for them, I would do it in a heart beat. I also would buy more of some of the other 01's if they were still around, some were very enjoyable to me.


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

I'm going to have to agree with SLR on this one. The EL's are a great marketing scheme by Habanos SA, but the cigars themselves are mediocre at best......and I don't see these "getting better" with age.

In order for a cigar to improve with age, they have to be decent to begin with. Ageing itself will not transform a mediocre cigar into a great cigar.
When you age a crappy cigar, what you end up with an aged, crappy cigar.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Some were medicore, some were fantastic. I just smoked a couple more of my 01 Monte D.C.'s last night. Awsome cigar and better than any current production D.C. IMO. These were not impressive at all young, but have transformed into a great smoke, so I don't agree with Bruce at all. BTW, some cigars I thought were pretty crappy turned into awsome smokes down the road. Take my last batch of Partagas D4's. They were sick and not even worth smoking. Bruce says they transform into great smokes at 5 years, so a bit of a contradiction there.


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

LOL!
Not a contradiction. A cigar has to show potential when young in order to make a prediction of improving with age.
IMHO the EL's do not. I don't care for the extra expense for a mediocre cigar with a thick, coarse inflammable wrapper.....not to mention the flavor.

Again, what do you get when you age a $hitty cigar?
A $hitty old cigar!


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Your opinion, and your entitled to it. For the most part I agree, they were not worth the extra money. There were however several that were very good. I never paid full price for any of them. Always bought on sale, at close to reg. production cigar prices. You think they all suck, whatever. What do I know, Ive only been smoking Cubans close to ten years and have aged and smoked all of the 01 L.E.'s. Again, not all of these cigars had a course fireproof wrapper. All of the Hoyo Particualrs and Monte D.C.'s I have smoked burned fine. I had one box of Monte robustos that just did not want to burn.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Bruce said:


> LOL!
> Not a contradiction. A cigar has to show potential when young in order to make a prediction of improving with age.
> IMHO the EL's do not. I don't care for the extra expense for a mediocre cigar with a thick, coarse inflammable wrapper.....not to mention the flavor.
> 
> ...


It is a contradiction IMO. If you were to smoke one of those D4's I had when they went sick (at about 3 months age), you would not be able to tell whether they had potential or not. They were weak and bland. They only showed potential before they went sick, before 3 months age. So are you going to tell me you tried every single L.E. at one or 2 months age and determined NONE had any potential? Hard to believe my friend. I agree if you age a $hitty cigar you end up with an aged $hitty cigar. All I'm saying is not all of these were shitty cigars. Some sucked, some were mediocre, and some were fantastic. They were inconsistant just like regular production Cubans are. Just because you got some bad ones doesn't mean they were all bad. I also agree with not liking the thicker wrappers, but I can tell you for a fact not all were bad. Some were actually closer to a dark reg. production wrapper. Iv'e had my share of current pro. cigars with thick wrappers that don't burn also.


----------



## Bruce (Dec 31, 1999)

LOL!
Relax Fredster.....we are just talking about cigars!
Also, if you read my post, all along I stated that it is just my humble opinion, and that I agreed with SLR.
The only thing I disagreed with you was your statement that ageing improves all cuban cigars.

And yes, I have tried the EL's.....going back to the originals with age on them. I don't like them, but then again, that's JMHO!


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Bruce said:


> LOL!
> Relax Fredster.....we are just talking about cigars!
> Also, if you read my post, all along I stated that it is just my humble opinion, and that I agreed with SLR.
> The only thing I disagreed with you was your statement that ageing improves all cuban cigars.
> ...


Don't mistake my passion for cigars as being hostile. Aging Cuban cigars improves them, almost 100% of the time. Does it mean you can take any mediocre cigar and age it and end up with a great smoke, hell no. SOME of these E.L.'s have turned into very nice smokes after a few years. Opinion or not, I don't know how you can say they ALL suck and NONE will improve with age. That may be the case with some or most of them, but all is just crazy. I don't see how you can paint with that broad of a brush. You don't think the Hoyo Particular was a good smoke? Maybe I just got a good batch of the Monte D.C.'s, but everyone thats tried them has flipped over them. Recently over the holidays I smoked some aged cigars including Part C-Hills from 1982,Hoyo Epicure #2 from 94, Romeo C-Hills from 94, and R.A. C.G. from 1994. IMHO the Monte D.C's I have are better than the Hoyo and the Romeo. The 82 Part. and the R.A. were just incredible smokes. The Monte D.C.'s are very similar to the Monte Millenium Robustos. A bit more complex, but the same flavor profile and very rich and deep. I'm off to Chicago so I'm done for a while. Bruce I respect your knowledge and passion for cigars, especially aged and rare!


----------

